Kalamata:
"If fossil evidence for evolution actually existed, you wouldn't be trying to send us on wild-goose-chases." You asked for evidence so I'm showing you where to find it -- physical evidence in a natural history museum, read books for explanations.
Your problem is, by your own admissions, you've spent time in museums and "have thousands of books" (post #290), but still can't find evidence.
That makes you a Denier, Rule #1.
Kalamata: "That is a book for fossil collectors, Alinsky Joe, not scientists:"
You asked for evidence, there are pictures of evidence.
Kalamata: "As you can see, that book was not intended to be a science book.
Perhaps it could be used in a survey course for non-science majors, but not as a science book."
According to your own admission (post #290), you already have thousands (!) of books on evolution, and yet can't find evidence there.
No Holocaust denier I debated ever made such an amazing claim.
Kalamata: "It would be very easy to show us scientific evidence for evolution, if there was such a thing.
It doesn't exist."
That is Kalamata obeying Denier Rule #1.
Kalamata: "Archaeological dating, like evolutionism rock dating, is based on circular reasoning; "
It's based on dozens of different dating techniques, these, for example
Kalamata: "As I told you before, growth rates are not determined by what happens in between the beginning and ending dates, but rather the rate of change of the population over that time period."
Your formula is deceptive because, as the graph shows, the rate of change changed drastically after roughly 1800 AD.
Kalamata: "Baloney."
That is Kalamata slavishly obeying Denier Rule #1.
Kalamata: "There is no such thing as an evolutionary tree, Alinsky Joe, except in the imaginations of wishful thinkers.
There are, however, lots of Diversity Bushes: one for each kind."
LOL. "Bushes" which date back millions of years are indistinguishable from "trees".
Kalamata: "Fossil dates are cherry-picked, fossils are manipulated to make them appear to be something they are not, and there is no evidence a human, or any other organism existed millions of years ago."
That is Denier Rules #1 & #6.
Kalamata: "Jerry Coyne is a rabid evolutionist and anti-Christian.
For him to write and publish what he did back in 2009, long before the ENCODE report was released, is in-your-face confirmation that the genetic data promoted by evolutionists was highly questionable."
Naw, it's simply a matter of different techniques & assumptions produce different results.
The bottom line is still this: no matter how you measure it, no living species are more closely related to humans than chimps & bonobos.
Kalamata: "Of course, all you have to back up your dogmatic assertion is that silly, fabricated skull chart"
Nonsense, but by your own admission (post #290), you already have "thousands of books" on evolution, and you can't find evidence there!
So nothing I tell you can make a difference.
You are slavishly devoted to Denier Rule #1.
Kalamata: "Try to stay on topic, Alinsky Joe.
Behe said animals could not "evolve" beyond the family level, and the secular research by the Swiss team that I linked confirmed Behe's conclusion, at least for humans, which cannot evolve."
Total nonsense.
Fossils suggest the higher order of "primates" began splitting into separate "families" of monkeys & apes as long ago as 63 million years.
Kalamata: "The research by the aforementioned Swiss team was reported by the secular American Association for the Advancement of Science, and other mainstream secular science organizations and magazines."
I have no doubt that your unsubstantiated claim here misrepresents the facts.
It's your modus operandi.
Kalamata: "You really are a lightweight, Alinsky Joe."
Kalamata, you are a propagandist, slavishly devoted to every Denier Rule, especially #5, #6 & #7. ![]()
>>Kalamata: “If fossil evidence for evolution actually existed, you wouldn’t be trying to send us on wild-goose-chases.”
>>Joey said: “You asked for evidence so I’m showing you where to find it — physical evidence in a natural history museum, read books for explanations.”
No, Joey, I asked for evidence and you don’t know where to find it, because there is none.
*****************
>>Joey said, “Your problem is, by your own admissions, you’ve spent time in museums and “have thousands of books” (post #290), but still can’t find evidence.
It is not a problem for me, Joey; it is a problem for charlatans like you — those trying to convince me and others that the lack of evidence is evidence.
Charlie explained how his theory was supposed to work. Show us evidence that it actually worked, and I will become an evolutionist (again,) and fade away into the sunset. In the meantime, I won’t hold my breath.
*****************
>>Joey said, “That makes you a Denier, Rule #1.”
Child.
*****************
>>Kalamata: “That is a book for fossil collectors, Alinsky Joe, not scientists:”
>>Joey said, “You asked for evidence, there are pictures of evidence.”
Fossils are evidence of a quick burial in sediment carried by a flood of highly-mineralized sea water, Joey. I asked you for evidence of evolution.
*****************
>>Kalamata: “As you can see, that book was not intended to be a science book. Perhaps it could be used in a survey course for non-science majors, but not as a science book.”
>>Joey said, “According to your own admission (post #290), you already have thousands (!) of books on evolution, and yet can’t find evidence there.”
That is correct. There is no evidence for evolution in any of my books, and I have a very extensive collection, covering all graduate-level evolutionary fields.
*****************
>>Kalamata: “No Holocaust denier I debated ever made such an amazing claim.”
You have never debated a holocaust denier. That claim is your fallback when you cannot defend your warped religion of evolutionism. Slander is the chief tool of practically every evolutionist.
Rule #1 of the evolutionism cult is, “If you can’t convince them, slander them.”
*****************
>>Kalamata: “It would be very easy to show us scientific evidence for evolution, if there was such a thing. It doesn’t exist.”
>>Joey said, “That is Kalamata obeying Denier Rule #1.
Child.
*****************
>>Kalamata: “Archaeological dating, like evolutionism rock dating, is based on circular reasoning; “
>>Joey said, “It’s based on dozens of different dating techniques, these, for example, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chronological_dating.
Joey, I exhort you to refrain from using Wikipedia as proof text. It makes you look dumber than you already look.
*****************
>>Kalamata: “As I told you before, growth rates are not determined by what happens in between the beginning and ending dates, but rather the rate of change of the population over that time period.”
>>Joey said, “Your formula is deceptive because, as the graph shows, the rate of change changed drastically after roughly 1800 AD.”
Growth rates are what they are, Joey.
*****************
>>Kalamata: “Baloney.”
>>Joey said, “That is Kalamata slavishly obeying Denier Rule #1.
Child.
*****************
>>Kalamata: “There is no such thing as an evolutionary tree, Alinsky Joe, except in the imaginations of wishful thinkers. There are, however, lots of Diversity Bushes: one for each kind.”
>>Joey said: “LOL. “Bushes” which date back millions of years are indistinguishable from “trees”.
Just when I begin to think you have finally ran out of dumb things to say, you say something even dumber. Every evolutionary scholar worth his salt is aware that Darwin’s Tree of Life is a relic. Perhaps this scholar will help you get up to speed:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L0-hgSjnomA&list=PLrCQerz2L0IfueZknzBALW1pOfwNORn_5&index=18&t=17m47s
The Chinese scholar is really cool, huh?
*****************
>>Kalamata: “Fossil dates are cherry-picked, fossils are manipulated to make them appear to be something they are not, and there is no evidence a human, or any other organism existed millions of years ago.”
>>Joey said: “That is Denier Rules #1 & #6.
Child.
*****************
>>Kalamata: “Jerry Coyne is a rabid evolutionist and anti-Christian. For him to write and publish what he did back in 2009, long before the ENCODE report was released, is in-your-face confirmation that the genetic data promoted by evolutionists was highly questionable.”
>>Joey said: “Naw, it’s simply a matter of different techniques & assumptions produce different results.
I am trying to be kind here, Joey, but your obsession in believing you know more about genetics than some of the top scientists in the world is similar to what is typically called, delusions of grandeur.
*****************
>>Joey said: “The bottom line is still this: no matter how you measure it, no living species are more closely related to humans than chimps & bonobos.
That is a just-so story, Joey. Science requires evidence.
*****************
>>Kalamata: “Of course, all you have to back up your dogmatic assertion is that silly, fabricated skull chart”
>>Joey said: “Nonsense, but by your own admission (post #290), you already have “thousands of books” on evolution, and you can’t find evidence there! So nothing I tell you can make a difference.
Thus far, Joey, I am unconvinced you have any knowlege about any field of evolution that we have been discussing. You don’t seem to know even the most rudimentary aspects or doctrine. Any child can search Wikipedia, or post photos of Museum mockups, as you are comfortable in doing. But that is not science, Joey.
*****************
>>Joey said: “You are slavishly devoted to Denier Rule #1.
Delusional child.
*****************
>>Kalamata: “Try to stay on topic, Alinsky Joe. Behe said animals could not “evolve” beyond the family level, and the secular research by the Swiss team that I linked confirmed Behe’s conclusion, at least for humans, which cannot evolve.”
>>Joey said: “Total nonsense. Fossils suggest the higher order of “primates” began splitting into separate “families” of monkeys & apes as long ago as 63 million years.
That is just another story, Joey, with no supporting evidence, and it is beyond obvious that you are completely and totally ignorant of modern research. May I recommend you confine your debates to something other than science, such as Political Science, which is not science; or cooking, in which you will do well as long as you don’t burn the food or poison anyone.
*****************
>>Kalamata: “The research by the aforementioned Swiss team was reported by the secular American Association for the Advancement of Science, and other mainstream secular science organizations and magazines.”
>>Joey said: “I have no doubt that your unsubstantiated claim here misrepresents the facts. It’s your modus operandi.
You are too scientifically illiterate to understand what I am about to say, Joey; but you are embarrassing yourself.
*****************
>>Kalamata: “You really are a lightweight, Alinsky Joe.”
>>Joey said: “Kalamata, you are a propagandist, slavishly devoted to every Denier Rule, especially #5, #6 & #7.
Foolish child.
Mr. Kalamata